Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
sulghunter331

A Thought on Battleship and Cruiser Relations

74 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

270
[HCH]
Beta Testers
858 posts
7,179 battles

Seeing the current climate of vocal cruiser captains espousing their general hatred towards battleships and the battleship captains, I want to try and explain, so that all may come to an understanding.

Currently, I have seen the following as the general ideas commonly espoused is the power imbalance between cruisers and battleships, and how battleships captains are more likely to sit back and snipe instead of leading a push against a flank, taking all the punishment so that the cruisers can last longer.

Lets look at the general physical aspects of both types of ships. Battleships have belt armor that can be as thick as 18" and guns as big as 18", as it is seen on the Yamato, all the way down to guns just 11" on the Scharnhorst, or armor just 11" thick on the South Carolina. Even at the smallest or thinnest, the guns and armors on the battleships easily dwarf the guns and armor found on almost every cruiser. The biggest gun found any cruiser is the Graf Spee's 11" guns, whilst the Moskva has the thickest belt armor of any cruiser at 6". Obviously, Graf Spee is an exception, and the next biggest gun is 9.45" on the HIV. As it can be seen, every single battleship out-guns every single cruiser, and has armor that is far thicker than anything the cruisers have. Comparing battleships and cruisers in vein of how well they can stand up in a straight up fight, of course the battleships will come out on top a majority of the time, the battleships are simply better equipped for this type of duty (fun fact, battleship is the shortening of the term "line of battle ship"). As one admiral once said: "Our cruisers can't repel firepower of that magnitude". From a historical stand point, just look at Jutland to see how lightly armored ships stand up to battleship grade firepower.

Spoiler

To cruiser captains complaining about battleships being to strong against cruisers.

CnOMbocW8AAeeA1.jpg

 

Spoiler

Expecting a cruiser to survive the fire power of a battleship is like expecting something like thisIazBIfLFbDC6LEZjN2TDAU8j-QwjR3JLdvfhLI3P

to survive getting shot at by this298?cb=20170115034832

when that thing is designed to take down something like this29763841492_d0be23a9d9_m.jpg

Now, for a look at the design philosophies of both types, firstly, the battleships. Battleships are meant to be the big battle wagons that you'd find in a major engagement ( although, those major engagements only ever happened twice, with various skirmishes). Thus, the battleships are equipped with thick armor to survive the battering they'd receive in such engagements, and have guns big enough to have even a hope of penetrating the thick armor of the enemy battleships. With cruisers, their mission was entirely different. Instead of participating in battles, they were instead made to take on missions away from the main fleet, patrolling distant territories, chasing down enemy shipping and lighter warships, and escorting larger ships, making heavy guns and armor largely superfluous, and making greater speed and smaller (read cheaper) ships a higher priority for the designers.

 

On to the second point: overly timid battleship captains. Cruiser captains want the battleships to charge in so that the battleships are the ones getting shot at instead of the cruisers. Battleships are not RPG tanks that run in and draw aggro to let the squishy DPS live. Yes, battleships have fat stacks of armor, and the durability to match, but that still doesn't make them them the fleet's meat shield. Those attributes are there to fight enemy battleships, not to run around like some rodeo clown attracting as much attention to themselves as possible. Should they stay on the back line taking max range shots? No, of course not, but they shouldn't just charge in for the sake of getting shot at, so that the cruisers are not shot at. Battleship captains have the responsibility of keeping their big guns firing as long as possible, while at the same time making sure that those very same guns are in a position to be as effective as possible. Running in at full speed would certainly get those guns into an effective position, but will get the battleship quickly sunk, while firing from the back line will keep them firing, but they are quite possibly at the least effective position possible.

If anything, it's the responsibility of the cruisers to protect the battleships from enemy cruisers and destroyers, to keep the big guns firing. That does not mean running down enemy destroyers or going up and shooting at enemy cruisers, it's to make sure that those threats can't make any approach to the battleship. Cruisers are better suited for pealing off lighter ships attacking the battleships, with their rapid firing guns and radar and sonar.

In summation, battleships are simply better built to take more punishment, and to keep swinging harder than any cruiser, and people need to stop thinking that this is some MMORPG with battleships being some sort of tank class and cruisers being the fragile damage dealing class that require extensive protection to exist for anything longer than 5 seconds.

Spoiler

Before anyone accuses me of being some baBBy, I play cruisers and battleships damn near equally, and last I checked, I actually have more cruiser games than battleship games.

 

  • Cool 4
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
415
[FAE]
Members
2,122 posts
2,531 battles

Your post is rather sensible. However, based on your own premise, you could explore that this game doesn't give cruisers the ability to shine or work in the away from the main fleet/guns/danger way that you show they were designed to. Would you like to increase the considerations of your post? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,360 posts
3,915 battles
2 minutes ago, sulghunter331 said:

If anything, it's the responsibility of the cruisers to protect the battleships from enemy cruisers and destroyers, to keep the big guns firing. That does not mean running down enemy destroyers or going up and shooting at enemy cruisers, it's to make sure that those threats can't make any approach to the battleship. Cruisers are better suited for pealing off lighter ships attacking the battleships, with their rapid firing guns and radar and sonar.

Despite my handle, I am a definitive BB main. And the problem with this assertion is that it's excellent in theory, but falls apart in practice. When the enemy flank is pushing with 2-3 battleships, cruisers really can't do anything but fall back - many can be citadeled through the bows or when angled, and even if they can't, so many battleships are firing HE these days as a default that a cruiser minus repair party will quickly be burned to the waterline. 

If the game actually played a little more like a sim, where battleships were much more powerful than the other types, but also extremely vulnerable to air attack; where cruisers could operate independently without having to worry about running into battleships, or could play the escorting role and still acquire XP, this wouldn't be a problem - you would actually see cruisers "behaving" like cruisers. But, as things stand, with cruisers generally being first-priority targets alongside DDs, they're understandably very unwilling to unnecessarily hazard themselves on the behalf of their battleship teammates.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,053
[OPG]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,872 posts
10,416 battles

Nerf bbs already damnit

  • Funny 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
270
[HCH]
Beta Testers
858 posts
7,179 battles
2 minutes ago, BlailBlerg said:

Your post is rather sensible. However, based on your own premise, you could explore that this game doesn't give cruisers the ability to shine or work in the away from the main fleet/guns/danger way that you show they were designed to. Would you like to increase the considerations of your post? 

Well, the only IRL duty that they were deigned for that they can realistically exercise being the "escort" role. This would generally entail scaring off any destroyer or cruiser that's peppering that battleships, and providing AA cover against air attacks. Unless we get a PVE mode where we have to run around to sink enemy shipping and light warships largely alone, I don't really see how it can be anything else for the cruisers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,360 posts
3,915 battles
1 minute ago, Fog_Battleship_NCarolina said:

Nerf bbs already damnit

I think a better idea would be to strengthen cruisers, either by giving them all a default heal IN ADDITION to their other abilities, lowering citadels, or something else defensive. The problem with cruisers is that they have high curb appeal - they're fast, maneuverable, have awesome AA, high ROF/DPS - but exceedingly unforgiving in actual gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
270
[HCH]
Beta Testers
858 posts
7,179 battles
4 minutes ago, Cruiser_Fiume said:

Despite my handle, I am a definitive BB main. And the problem with this assertion is that it's excellent in theory, but falls apart in practice. When the enemy flank is pushing with 2-3 battleships, cruisers really can't do anything but fall back - many can be citadeled through the bows or when angled, and even if they can't, so many battleships are firing HE these days as a default that a cruiser minus repair party will quickly be burned to the waterline. 

If the game actually played a little more like a sim, where battleships were much more powerful than the other types, but also extremely vulnerable to air attack; where cruisers could operate independently without having to worry about running into battleships, or could play the escorting role and still acquire XP, this wouldn't be a problem - you would actually see cruisers "behaving" like cruisers. But, as things stand, with cruisers generally being first-priority targets alongside DDs, they're understandably very unwilling to unnecessarily hazard themselves on the behalf of their battleship teammates.

Well, the general idea is that battleships are staying at such a range from the main enemy concentration (read: nearest squad of enemy battleships), that only enemy battleship guns can reach them. at this point, the cruisers can have an easier time of dodging volleys.

As a battleship main as well, the biggest reason why I target cruisers before battleships is because of fire, in combination with the fact that they can be taken out of the match far more quickly and easily than battleships, thus more quickly reducing the number of guns shooting at me.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
191 posts

While there's all sorts of realism that gets thrown out the window for the game, I think a large portion of the complaints BB's get could be fixed by one single measure:

Rotate the starting locations of BB in relationship to other ships. (EG: Not in the Back)
This gets them closer to the action from the start.

If the Devs wanted it to go further, add an aura to the map as i suggested awhile back that requires a certain distance from the "objectives" after a certain length of time, failure to do so entails the destruction of the ship (and its cost penalties) and no rewards given out. Would affect all but CV, but the limit or reactive of the timer wouldnt be so short/long as to preclude the hunting of CV.

After all abandoning the mission/objective, is treason.
/shrug, but what do i know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
270
[HCH]
Beta Testers
858 posts
7,179 battles
2 minutes ago, TheCricketMan said:

If you are a BB ... which cruiser is best to stick with?  Kraut? Nip? or Guinnea Wap?

Well, I would have to say that the best escort cruisers would have to be the yanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
270
[HCH]
Beta Testers
858 posts
7,179 battles
9 minutes ago, Fog_Battleship_NCarolina said:

Nerf bbs already damnit

This adds nothing to the discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,360 posts
3,915 battles
2 minutes ago, sulghunter331 said:

Well, the general idea is that battleships are staying at such a range from the main enemy concentration (read: nearest squad of enemy battleships), that only enemy battleship guns can reach them. at this point, the cruisers can have an easier time of dodging volleys.

As a battleship main as well, the biggest reason why I target cruisers before battleships is because of fire, in combination with the fact that they can be taken out of the match far more quickly and easily than battleships, thus more quickly reducing the number of guns shooting at me.

The reason I primarily target cruisers is threefold:

1) They're squishy, particularly when initially positioning.

2) Eliminating them protects my destroyers, which is the key for victory.

3) Early deaths have both a cumulative physical effect AND a demoralizing one. 

Basically, they're easy prey, and exploding them has a big impact. And since, at this point, I don't think potato players are going to get any less prone to screwing up, than cruisers need to actually gain some additional resiliency, or be remain in the doghouse. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
30 posts
936 battles

I don't understand why the ships with biggest balls (I assume that is what BB stands for)  is usually driven by someone with rice grains for nuts.  They so scared to wade into the battle....   go hide on the edge of the map.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
104
[GRRR]
[GRRR]
Members
586 posts
20,673 battles

   Most naval war games would have a way of representing the different values of ships, economic cost and combat worth, as a part of the combat itself. DD's and cruisers always screen the battleships because they are 1/2, 1/3, or even 1/10 the cost but are also generally much less combat capable. Just look how fast the British CA's Suffolk and Norfolk got out of Bismarck's way when she 360ed to break the Prinz loose after the battle of the Denmark straight.

  But in WOWS, it's a basic conceit (and a desirable one for the goals of this game) that all ships are of equal value within the same tier regardless of class, a fallacy in real life. So in the game we say sure, a BB can kill a CA but the CA has better concealment, DPM etc that makes it "equal" in other ways. Problem is that unless you nerf BB dispersion into the ground and totally create an artificial equality, you're still going to have cruisers that just can't stand the shellfire at the same distance a BB can in active front. Hence, in the thick of a hard push, a smart cruiser Captain will either draw behind the BB's and drop HE barrages on everything starting with DD's, or risk and sacrifice his ship to find and kill DD's while being in front or with the BB's. The second course of action is perhaps the best but it's tough to tell a cruiser guy to move ahead, sacrifice his ship for the cap, DD kill, or BB yolo, and head back to port with 30k damage done and maybe a win 10 minutes later for a team he/she won't play with again for all intents and purposes.

  P.S. I run all 3 of the gun classes, all countries, and respect the hell out of all CV players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
377 posts
6,055 battles

Ya the whole historical argument really falls apart when you look at the accuracy of T8-10 BBs...which is way off....depending on your source: BB accuracy was around 3-5% hit ratio in WW2.

If the BBs in this game had the same level of accuracy as the above then CAs could be far more aggressive and play a more important role. As of right now they are basically force multipliers to BBs...but even still with the way HE mechanics work..many CA HE salvos will simply breakup on BBs for zero damage. Compare this to something like an Ibuki who can do everything right in terms of angling and dodging and simply eat two shots and be sent back to port.

Look at the low tiers where BB dispersion is bad...in these tiers BBs are balanced as they must get to close range before being able to guarantee a hit....this means CAs can be far more aggressive without fear of simply being deleted in single volleys...and BBs dont have the ability to simply take HE hits without paying a price.

Never liked stealth fire as it seemed a broken mechanic...but without that, there are a ton of CAs and CLs which simply become fodder from T7 on.

What to do to fix this? not really sure....perhaps drop citadels from  CA/CLs all together...so if a BB lands a full volley ..you're still going back to port..but they wont be a deleted by getting two random citadels. The other way is to simply make BBs capable of punishing each other ..as currently its extremely common to see BBs simply driving broadside without fear of real punishment. Sure they may take some pens..but rarely do you see a broadside BB get sent back to port as they aren't risking a real cit (Yamato being an exception)

Not at all saying that CAs are uber weak and need super buffs....you can still have great games and get good #s...the difference is that you simply cannot make any real mistakes as CA or you will be punished. CAs and DDs are really the only classes this is true for.

Would really like to see BBs play like the T8 NC where its tanky when angled but can be punished when you go broadside. That strikes me as balance, where as now its really only CAs and DDs who get "punished".

..esp if grinding an Ibuki :)

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,360 posts
3,915 battles
8 minutes ago, Roadrider7021 said:

that all ships are of equal value within the same tier regardless of class, a fallacy in real life.

I disagree that that's desirable - it inherently contradicts the premises of naval combat dating back to the middle ages. Big targets = more national treasure expended and lives involved = more important to sink/survive. It completely alters how teams arrange themselves, fight, prioritize targets, and - by association - the inherent strength of the units to have them balanced on a one-for-one basis. 

Obviously, changing this would be impossible - you'd have to remake the game. But I think they got it wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26
Beta Testers
166 posts
5,764 battles

I look at it as don't hate the player-hate the game. WG has continued to buff the BB class while nerfing cruisers through mechanic or direct changes. A perfect example is adrenaline rush - nice to have a perma reload buff with a two point skill of which BBs benefit a huge amount by. Again, I don't blame the players for this, they didn't create or develop this game. Just look at some of the gimicks BBs have been given that were once cruiser specific never mind their speed, armor, reload and concealment. This just continues to get worse every new line that comes out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
88
[CIAO]
[CIAO]
Members
366 posts
18,026 battles
10 minutes ago, Hanz_Gooblemienhoffen_42 said:

Ya the whole historical argument really falls apart when you look at the accuracy of T8-10 BBs...which is way off....depending on your source: BB accuracy was around 3-5% hit ratio in WW2.

If the BBs in this game had the same level of accuracy as the above then CAs could be far more aggressive and play a more important role. As of right now they are basically force multipliers to BBs...but even still with the way HE mechanics work..many CA HE salvos will simply breakup on BBs for zero damage. Compare this to something like an Ibuki who can do everything right in terms of angling and dodging and simply eat two shots and be sent back to port.

Look at the low tiers where BB dispersion is bad...in these tiers BBs are balanced as they must get to close range before being able to guarantee a hit....this means CAs can be far more aggressive without fear of simply being deleted in single volleys...and BBs dont have the ability to simply take HE hits without paying a price.

Never liked stealth fire as it seemed a broken mechanic...but without that, there are a ton of CAs and CLs which simply become fodder from T7 on.

What to do to fix this? not really sure....perhaps drop citadels from  CA/CLs all together...so if a BB lands a full volley ..you're still going back to port..but they wont be a deleted by getting two random citadels. The other way is to simply make BBs capable of punishing each other ..as currently its extremely common to see BBs simply driving broadside without fear of real punishment. Sure they may take some pens..but rarely do you see a broadside BB get sent back to port as they aren't risking a real cit (Yamato being an exception)

Not at all saying that CAs are uber weak and need super buffs....you can still have great games and get good #s...the difference is that you simply cannot make any real mistakes as CA or you will be punished. CAs and DDs are really the only classes this is true for.

Would really like to see BBs play like the T8 NC where its tanky when angled but can be punished when you go broadside. That strikes me as balance, where as now its really only CAs and DDs who get "punished".

..esp if grinding an Ibuki :)

The fix is easy, but would be unacceptable to both WOWs and BB mains.

Either increase the dispersion of high tier battleships or limit the number allowed in a match to 2. By increasing dispersion a cruiser would still get hurt if hit, but that wouldn't happen as much. That should make other BBs a more desirable target rather than CAs and CLs.  Or reduce the number of BBs allowed in the match. Right now most of the time the most numerous type of ship in the queues are BBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
456
[LUCK]
Members
1,276 posts
19,091 battles

This is the only relationship between cruisers and battleships I see.

BBonfire.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
377 posts
6,055 battles
3 minutes ago, gillhunter said:

The fix is easy, but would be unacceptable to both WOWs and BB mains.

Either increase the dispersion of high tier battleships or limit the number allowed in a match to 2. By increasing dispersion a cruiser would still get hurt if hit, but that wouldn't happen as much. That should make other BBs a more desirable target rather than CAs and CLs.  Or reduce the number of BBs allowed in the match. Right now most of the time the most numerous type of ship in the queues are BBs.

Sure..I'm open to anything to be honest...and just buffing everything seems the wrong way to do it.

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,258
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
8,783 posts
14,864 battles
58 minutes ago, Fog_Battleship_NCarolina said:

Nerf bbs already damnit

Read the in-game name.

48 minutes ago, sulghunter331 said:

This adds nothing to the discussion.

You really do not get sarcasm, do you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29
[-DOG-]
[-DOG-]
Members
40 posts
8,252 battles

Maybe a solution would be to make cruisers more survivable by making thier citadels  smaller,as dds actually had theirs removed for better gameplay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,416 posts
2,213 battles
45 minutes ago, Hanz_Gooblemienhoffen_42 said:

Never liked stealth fire as it seemed a broken mechanic...but without that, there are a ton of CAs and CLs which simply become fodder from T7 on.

A band-aid I can think of is smoke, but different. All ships used smoke, but the kind i'm thinking off doesn't cover an area to hide you in. This version would would work like camo and either increase incoming dispersion or lower your concealment all around for a limited time to create something similar to stealth fire. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,643 posts
13,502 battles

As long as Cruisers continue to be fast kills to BBs due to their massive citadels, nothing's going to change.

BB mains seem to look at Cruisers two ways; If the CA is red, as a easy kill since the BB main's mindset seems to be that they must get kills. Winning the battle is secondary. If the CA if friendly, it's there to draw aggro off of the BBs.

As a Cruiser main, I've gotten to where I detest BBs more than I do CVs. (amazing eh?) I don't have as many problems with enemy CVs as I do with enemy BBs and I often get support from friendly CVs while rarely, if ever, getting any from BBs.

8 minutes ago, Capitan_Crunch said:

Maybe a solution would be to make cruisers more survivable by making thier citadels  smaller,as dds actually had theirs removed for better gameplay

That would make sense but Cruisers seem to be WG's redheaded stepchildren.

Edited by ReddNekk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,597
Members
17,807 posts
5,084 battles
48 minutes ago, Cruiser_Fiume said:

I disagree that that's desirable - it inherently contradicts the premises of naval combat dating back to the middle ages. Big targets = more national treasure expended and lives involved = more important to sink/survive. It completely alters how teams arrange themselves, fight, prioritize targets, and - by association - the inherent strength of the units to have them balanced on a one-for-one basis. 

Obviously, changing this would be impossible - you'd have to remake the game. But I think they got it wrong.

TBH, you could approximate it, (and probably reduce the number of BBs in matches) by making service costs proportional. If I'm losing credits driving a T7 BB, but profitting in a T7 CA, I'll mostly be driving the CA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,597
Members
17,807 posts
5,084 battles
6 minutes ago, ReddNekk said:

 

That would make sense but Cruisers seem to be WG's redheaded stepchildren.

I'm ok with that, it makes driving one feel cooler lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×